Talk:Maria I of Portugal

Naming

D. Maria should be called Mary I of Portugal, because she was born before the 19th century! Please change this because it looks very disrespectful and offensive to portuguese people.

Is there a rule for not translating the names of monarchs born after the 19th century?Gameiro 02:25, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Translating names to English could apply to anyone who is dead. G0dzillaboy02 (talk) 08:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Maria is a name in English. And has been for centuries: Maria Walpole, Maria Linley, Maria Susanna Cummins, etc. DrKay (talk) 10:13, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Brazil monarchy

Maria I was a monarch to the Portuguese Crown. Brazilian monarchy starts in 1822, with the country's independence. Abueno97 (talk)

From 1808 to 1815, Brazil was elevated to Kingdom status and united with Portugal. As Portugal, Brazil, and Algarves were Kingdoms, Maria was Queen of all three. Zelani (talk) 05:06, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Joseph II of Portugal

There was only one king known as Joseph in all portuguese history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.201.88.233 (talk) 08:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

prince regent

Maria's son, the prince regent, is referred to as both John and João PurpleChez (talk) 17:52, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Why João instead of John?

Why do we link to the page John VI of Portugal, with a redirect João? It would make more sense to avoid the redirect & just use John. GoodDay (talk) 16:30, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 26 January 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. After much-extended time for discussion, there is a clear absence of consensus for the proposed moves. Neither title is impermissible, and the characterization of opposing arguments as weak does not lift them out of being policy-based. BD2412 T 21:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

---

• Maria I of Portugal → Maria I
• Maria II of Portugal → Maria II

– WP:NCROY (specifically WP:SOVEREIGN) tells us that we should Only use a territorial designation (e.g. country) when disambiguation is needed. There are no other sovereigns named Maria. Maria I and Maria II are already redirects to these articles. For completeness, I also note that Maria I and Maria II are listed on Mary I (disambiguation) and Mary II (disambiguation), respectively, but that the different spelling is sufficient to distinguish them from the English queens who are the primary topics there. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:47, 26 January 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Warm Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 14:06, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

• oppose Numbers aren't enough of a DAB—blindlynx 15:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

  Numbers are more than enough, per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Rosbif73 (talk) 10:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Support per nom. Both of these articles have been treated as WP:PRIMARYTOPICS for almost 20 years. estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:28, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Support per WP:SOVEREIGN. They are also primary topics. And there are no other queens regnant with these regnal names to the best of my knowledge. Keivan.f^Talk 00:41, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Support as primary topics. Killuminator (talk) 16:35, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Векочел (talk) 17:02, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Brazil has been notified of this discussion. Векочел (talk) 17:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Portugal has been notified of this discussion. Векочел (talk) 17:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose - Per WP:SOVEREIGN. The pages need disambiguation with Mary I of England, Maria I of Hungary, Maria II of Hungary and Mary II of England. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 18:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Neither of the Hungarian queens are commonly known as "Maria (I or II) of Hungary", so their article titles are naturally disambiguated by their WP:COMMONNAMEs, just as the English queens are. Rosbif73 (talk) 20:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. In this instance, far too ambiguous, per UmbrellaTheLeef. The name is just too common. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose The number only for a Portuguese queen is not sufficient for the average reader on the English-language wiki. Keep in mind that you people posting on this talk page do not qualify as "average". --Lubiesque (talk) 15:14, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

  Note to closer: this, like other oppose arguments here, is not a policy-based argument to oppose. WP:RECOGNIZABILITY only says a subject should be recognizable from its title by those who are familiar with the topic. There is no guidance anywhere in policy to make subjects recognizable from topics by "the average reader of the English-language wiki". --В²C ☎ 07:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose. Per UmbrellaTheLeef. Kind regards, Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 19:45, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose per Lubiesque. Srnec (talk) 12:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. There are many Maria/Mary, etc. Walrasiad (talk) 05:16, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. As others have noted, showing the country is important in the interests of our readers and necessary to make the subject of such articles sufficiently clear. Removing it isn’t an improvement for our readers (which policy instructs is our priority) and doesn’t seem to serve any purpose other than to satisfy a specialist editorial desire for maximal conciseness. The change to NCROY that's prompted this and other contentious RMs was ill-considered and should be revisited. ╠╣uw [talk] 17:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
• Support. There is a pandemic of weak opposition at these recent SOVEREIGN-related RMs, and this one is no exception. The move of Ferdinand VI of Spain was supported by 3 and opposed by 8, and yet the closer still found consensus to move, a decision upheld at Move Review because Supporters were policy-based, and Opposers were not. Here again Support is relying upon WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, WP:COMMONNAME, WP:PRECISE, WP:CONCISE and WP:SOVEREIGN, which is finally consistent with WP:CRITERIA (disambiguate only when necessary), while Oppose only offers weak WP:JDLI arguments; nothing based in policy. To argue a title which has been a PRIMARYREDIRECT to this article for over 20 years is "too ambiguous" to be the title of this article is frankly laughable. Let's get serious. --В²C ☎ 07:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
  • The argument about a PRIMARYREDIRECT is "weak" itself as you artfully put it. There are PRIMARYREDIRECTs that... stay PRIMARYREDIRECTs forever. That isn't strange or unusual, and is in fact common when there are multiple titles with which to refer to someone. If someone argues to move Lyndon B. Johnson to LBJ on the grounds that the latter has been a PRIMARYREDIRECT for ages and it's more concise, it'd never succeed.
• Oppose. Setting aside the spate of RMs on NCROY for a moment, this one is problematic and worse even from an idea that "policy" has decreed removal of countries by default. "Maria" is an exceptionally common name even strictly among nobility. Having a PRIMARYREDIRECT doesn't change this fact. "Maria I of Portugal" is far more informative for the vast majority of casual readers who, again, know far far less about historical monarchs than Wikipedia editors who edit nobility topics. SnowFire (talk) 22:26, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.